Lettonie

Né en 1958 en Lettonie, Edvins Inkens a effectué des études de journalisme à l'Université d'Etat lettone. Après avoir travaillé pendant une dizaine d'années comme éditeur et commentateur politique à la radio et à la télévision, il est entré en 1990 au Cabinet du Premier Ministre Ivars Godmanis en qualité de Conseiller pour les Affaires étrangères.

Ministre sans portefeuille dans le gouvernement de Valdis Birkavs en 1993 et 1994, puis élu député au Parlement letton, il a assumé la vice-présidence de la Commission de l'environnement et des affaires publiques.

Depuis 1996, Edvins Inkens est membre de la Commission des Affaires étrangères du Parlement et préside la Commission des Affaires européennes.

Il présente le point de vue letton sur l'intégration européenne.

First of all, I wish to thank you for this invitation in this meeting as a representative from Latvia and I am sure that our further discussion will be interesting and constructive. As you already heard, I am currently the Chairman of the European Affairs Committee of the Republic of Latvia Saeima, which is our Parliament.

The Parliament and this Committee oversees the manner in which Latvia's legislation is harmonised with European Union's legislation as well as the manner in which the Government is realising Latvia's integration process in EU. I would like to summarise the current situation in Latvia as follows. Generally, it is a current opinion within the EU community that December Helsinki EU summit will invite Latvia to begin negotiations to join the EU, which realistically will begin in March next year.

Thus Latvia is currently relating its national interests, which we try to defend during this negotiations with EU member States. We are also formulating the Government's negotiation mandate and otherwise preparing for the anticipated start of these negotiations. With this invitation to begin accession negotiations with the EU, Latvia will position itself on the final starting land for full membership in the EU. Latvia does not like reasons to be proud of its accomplishment today. During its nine years of restored independence and State sovereignty, we have realised a complete and irreversible reform by transforming our country from a Soviet Union province to an independent sovereign State in the fullest meaning of this word, the strong national administration system within a parliamentary democracy and a developing market economy.

I would like to answer in contest to other Central and Eastern European States. The three Baltic States had to recreate the State institutions from zero : establish ministers, embassies abroad and other State values, create a budget, sources of revenues and the like. Together, the three Baltic States with no doubt can be seen as relatively successful example in that transition to market economy and parliamentary democracy. Although each of us are relatively different States with some different speeds of reforms, nevertheless most of the world and Europe tend to view as a geopolitical union.

In the public opinion so well were to be made today in Latvia asking why it is necessary for Latvia to join the EU, I believe that the answers will be different substantially from those which would be given by the people for example in Hungary. This is due to the fact that in Latvia, and I believe for all the Baltic States, the main reason for our desire to join the EU is security. We of course understand that EU membership does not provide us direct security guarantees, but that indirect security guarantees are so impressive and obvious that after our full entry in the EU we can consider that the threat to the physical existence of our State will be substantially reduced. This desire for security is also one of the major issue for Europe today.

It is clear that Europe still is internally divided at least philosophically if not economically into different and potentially dangerous regions. In this context, the Baltic States are border States since we find ourselves in direct contact with Europe largest unknown Russia. Thus we are also most interested in how to create such a Europe in which all States will be predictable and friendly with their neighbours.

We are largely interested in the EU enlargement process, not only as it impacts us directly together with the other EU candidate States, which will result in a Europe of 26 or 27 States, but also how the infrastructures of all Europe will be developing later.

Currently, much discussion is heard about where the EU border could exist. Will it stop at the number of 40 States, or will it stop with Moldova and not include Ukraine, for example ? Any EU enlargement models allow us to conclude that the future European Union will have two characteristics : first, there will be regional aspects, and second, there will be multi-speed aspects.

1. Firstly, this means that EU enlargement will naturally result in a faster development of ties with those States, which are in direct geographical contact with the others. This will be particularly true for the Baltic Sea region since after the EU enlargement, the Baltic Sea will practically become an internal sea of the EU, with exemption of a small portion of Russia. All the other Baltic Sea States will be EU member States. This reality I believe will definitely result in a faster development or opportunities for this region.

2. The future European Union will most definitely include the factor of multiple speeds. European Monetary Union has already shown that for the accomplishment of distinct goals, especially for such important goals as common currency, criteria might be selected with which all the States can not comply. There may also be projects in which States may not wish to participate. After the EU enlargement, it will be clear that the future EU will include States which will be proceeding towards uniformed EU criteria and different speeds in separate groups. There will be also projects in which all States will not be participating at once.

Until now, I have only been mentioning the European Union. However, the EU is not all of Europe. The EU is the most dynamic part of Europe. However, the EU was created with the goal to guarantee peace within the European continent and to ensure that there will not be any essential basic differences between the EU States economically and socially. But today, the European Union has found itself in contradiction with these principles. The EU with its Brussels' motto has developed quite quickly and this means that such a difference will exist for some time into the future. Europe as a continent shall continue to be divided in the future and its future focus will be accenting the EU of the border.

Taking in account current development in Europe, it is possible that this wide gap will become larger every year, that economic and social problems will also grow. The problem, created at the EU by solving its own problems attempts is only making the common situation of Europe worse. But, as we have seen, problems and conflicts outside the EU nevertheless impact the EU itself. The obvious example is the Balkan conflict where there still exist different problems and problems areas at the periphery of Europe, in the Caucasus, in Russia, in Ukraine.

A question rises : with the fact that these problems exist beyond the EU borders are proof that these problems are not threatening to the EU itself ? I believe that the answer is clearly : no ! However, what shall we do to resolve these problems ? One thing is clear : ignoring these problems will not solve anything. It would be important that the EU and its speedily development nevertheless do not distance itself so much politically and economically in its development level from those States which are not now and will not in the near future be EU member States, since this could otherwise create feelings of inability, of being left behind and even of insecurity for the States.

This means that the EU capitals should think not only about competition with Russia and Tokyo but also about how to stabilise the situation and how to create opportunities also for the other States in Europe. However, it is much easier to talk about problems than to solve them. No one can provide an universal answer about how to help Russia and especially taking in account the unpredictable development of Russia's political situation and knowing that in Russia there is no uniform viewpoint concerning reforms and there are a number of people who wish to keep Russia's particular form of development, although it is in complete contradiction to the world's understanding of a normal development of a State.

In any case, it would have a negative impact if we were to create an EU other border which hopefully will soon exist between the Baltic States and Russia, which would be unfriendly to the EU. This is also important since, in contradiction to the ideals of all sorts of European unity or invest, it is a current structure of Europe. These European ideals would be exposed to a permanent risk.